@ISIDEWITHQuestionsSocial IssuesStarted 13yrs agoActive 13hrs ago

What is your stance on abortion?

Abortion is a medical procedure resulting in the termination of a human pregnancy and death of a fetus. In 2014 the French government passed a law which allowed women to get an abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy without providing a reason to their healthcare professional. This amended a 1975 law which allowed women to have an abortion if they proved they were in a situation of “duress”.

+
Expand
+ Settings x  

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 460 Paris 8 voters.

86%
Pro-choice
14%
Pro-life
70%
Pro-choice
10%
Pro-life
10%
Pro-choice, and providing birth control, sex education, and more social services will help reduce the number of abortions
4%
Pro-life, but allow in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother or child
3%
Pro-choice, I don’t agree but the government has no right to ban it
0%
Pro-life, and I also oppose abortion for victims of rape and incest
3%
Pro-choice, but ban after the first three months

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 460 Paris 8 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 460 Paris 8 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Paris 8 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9KGXTHTanswered…9mos9MO

Pro-choice, but ban after the first three months, unless proven cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother or child

 @8JBDNRZanswered…4yrs4Y

In case of eugenics abortion should be legal

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Abortion” news articles, updated frequently.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

Kamala’s Warning: ‘Unhinged’ Trump Seeks Dictatorial Power in 2024

Kamala Harris has attacked Donald Trump for seeking “unchecked power” if he wins the White House again, placing what she described as his threat to American democracy at the heart of her closing argument to voters less than two weeks before the presidential election.In a rare statement from the vice-president’s residence in Washington on Wednesday, Harris attacked Trump for being “increasingly unhinged and unstable” and said there would be no “guardrails” to restrain him during a second term in office.Harris’s comments were a reaction to comments in The New York Times from John Kelly, Trump’s former chief of staff, who said the ex-president was an “authoritarian” who admired Adolf Hitler and fell into the “general definition of fascist”.“The bottom line is this: We know what Donald Trump wants. He wants unchecked power. The question in 13 days will be, what do the American people want?” Harris said in her brief remarks.The Democratic candidate was speaking before heading to Pennsylvania for a televised town hall on CNN, while Trump was campaigning in GeorgiaThe Trump campaign rubbished Harris’s comments as “desperate” and “easily disproven”.Polls put the two candidates in one of the tightest White House races in recent memory, leaving both vying for a closing message that wins crucial undecided voters.While President Joe Biden frequently referred to Trump as a threat to democracy before ending his re-election bid in July, Harris’s pitch had focused instead on defending personal freedoms, such as abortion, and economic benefits for the middle class, often dismissing Trump as unserious and bizarre.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2wks2W

Republican Heartland Embraces Abortion Rights Amid National Fight

Voters in seven states approved ballot amendments establishing a right to abortion in their state constitutions, continuing a broad repudiation of the abortion bans enacted since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.Missouri, which was the first state to officially enact an abortion ban after Roe was overturned in 2022, became the first state where voters ended a ban at the ballot box, with 52 percent approving the measure. A similar amendment passed by 57 percent in Montana, another Republican-controlled state. In two battleground states, Nevada and Arizona, measures to enshrine a right to abortion passed, with more than 60 percent of the vote for each.But the abortion rights movement also hit its limits, stalling in what had been a winning streak on ballot measures post-Roe, as voters in three Republican-controlled states, Florida, South Dakota and Nebraska, rejected amendments that would have established a constitutional right to abortion.Even as they hailed their victories, abortion rights supporters warned that the second Trump administration could use federal power to essentially invalidate the new state-level protections.President-elect Donald J. Trump boasted on the campaign trail of having overturned Roe — he appointed the three justices who helped swing the court majority. And anti-abortion activists have laid plans for a second Trump administration to use existing federal statutes to ban abortion pills, and to use the 14th Amendment to establish fetal personhood, which would effectively criminalize abortion at any stage of pregnancy. A Republican-controlled Congress could look to pass a federal abortion ban.Opponents of abortion rights looked at the results and saw victory. “Supported by the abortion industry and its allies, Harris and Walz campaigned with fanatical fervor on abortion — and the voters rejected them,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life.And Democrats who hoped that support for ballot measures would also lift their candidates to victory were largely disappointed.The groups backing the winning measures, however, said the victories even in states that went solidly for Mr. Trump were a clear signal that most Americans, regardless of party, age or gender, do not want the government restricting abortion.Republican Heartland Embraces Abortion Rights Amid National Fight

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1 day1D

Starmer Throws Netanyahu Under the ICC Bus: UK Backs Arrest Warrant for Israeli PM

Sir Keir Starmer has backed the International Criminal Court (ICC) after it issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister.When asked about the issue, Sir Keir’s official spokesman said the Government respected the independence of the court.He declined to say whether Mr Netanyahu would be arrested if he arrived in the UK.The spokesman said: “We respect the independence of the ICC, which is the primary institutional institution for investigating and prosecuting the most serious crimes in relation to international law.“This Government has been clear that Israel has a right to defend itself in accordance with international law. There is no moral equivalence between Israel, a democracy and Hamas and Lebanese Hezbollah, which are terror groups.“We remain focused on pushing for an immediate ceasefire to bring an end to the devastating violence in Gaza.”Under the Conservatives, the British government had told the court it intended to challenge the plans for the arrest warrants.However, weeks after coming to power, Sir Keir’s government reversed that position and said it would not object.Downing Street also declined to say whether Mr Netanyahu would be welcome to visit Britain in the future.Sir Keir’s spokesman said: “We never comment on future international visits but my position on the Prime Minister’s support for Israel in terms of its right to defend itself in accordance with international law is very clear.”The spokesman repeatedly declined to “go into hypotheticals” about whether Mr Netanyahu would be arrested if he arrived in the UK.He added: “It’s not up to the Prime Minister to determine other world leaders’ travel schedules. He engages and will continue to engage with the prime minister of Israel in support of Israel’s right to defend itself.”Pressed on what he meant by his comments about the court, the spokesman said: “It means that we respect the independence of the ICC. We respect the fact that the ICC is the primary international institution for investigating and prosecuting the most serious crimes of international concern.”The spokesman went on to say the Government’s “focus” remained an end to the violence in the Middle East, which has been ongoing for more than a year after the Oct 7 terror attacks by Hamas.

▲  148 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…12hrs12H

ICC Arrest Warrants Push Israel Into Unprecedented Global Backlash

Arrest warrants issued for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister over alleged war crimes threaten to deepen the global isolation of a country already under pressure around the world for its handling of the war in the Gaza Strip.Israeli officials are concerned the warrants and the still-secret details of the charges could imperil Israeli government and military officials who travel abroad and could be detained for alleged war crimes.The move by the International Criminal Court will complicate travel by Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who would risk arrest in any of the court’s 124 member countries, which technically are obliged to enforce the arrest warrants.The warrants will lead some governments to scale down contacts with Netanyahu and other Israeli officials, according to legal experts and officials familiar with the situation. They could also spur efforts to bring new war-crimes cases against lower-ranking Israeli and Hamas officials in national courts in Europe and elsewhere. More subtly, they could also encourage an ad-hoc pattern of shunning Israeli academics, defense companies and officials that has taken root in countries and institutions angry at the toll of the war in Gaza.The ICC warrants are likely to have the greatest effect on Israel’s relations with countries in Europe, which have been broadly supportive of Israel since Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack and the resulting war. All 27 members of the European Union, along with the U.K., are parties to the Rome Statute, the international treaty that created the court.European countries have been split in their reactions to the decision. Some, such as the Netherlands, say plainly they would enforce the arrest warrants. Hungary, led by right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, invited Netanyahu to visit on Friday in defiance of the ICC’s decision. Germany, caught between its support for the court and its history of the Holocaust, said it would carefully examine any steps it takes should Netanyahu or Gallant decide to visit.“Almost all of them would arrest Netanyahu if he were to visit, which means it’s pretty guaranteed that he won’t,” said Anthony Dworkin, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. “I’d be quite surprised even if he goes to Hungary.”

▲  178 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1 day1D

Donald Trump nominates Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General

Former President and 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General of the United States, should he reclaim the presidency in the upcoming election.Bondi, a prominent figure in Republican politics, served as Florida's Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. She gained national attention for her legal battles on issues such as health care reform, consumer protection, and opioid abuse litigation. Known for her steadfast support of Trump during his presidency, Bondi also served as a key adviser during his first impeachment trial, where she defended his administration against accusations of abuse of power.In a statement released by his campaign, Trump praised Bondi’s “unwavering commitment to justice” and her “track record of standing up for everyday Americans against the abuses of Washington’s elites.”“Pam Bondi has been a fearless advocate for the people, and she embodies the principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law that are sorely needed to restore trust in our justice system,” Trump said. “She is the right person to lead the Department of Justice into a new era of integrity and excellence.”While Bondi’s nomination has been met with applause from conservative circles, it has also reignited criticism from Democrats and ethics watchdogs. Her acceptance of a $25,000 donation from the Trump Foundation in 2013, which coincided with her decision not to pursue an investigation into Trump University, has drawn scrutiny in the past and resurfaced following the announcement.Democratic leaders have already voiced opposition, questioning Bondi’s ability to lead the Department of Justice independently. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) called the nomination “a political power play” and urged a focus on “restoring integrity, not entrenching partisanship.”

▲  2316 replies